Talk:City in the Sky
i once read somewhere that in oot there was going to be a sky/wind temple.so i think that city in the sky is that temple. Doubtful. The City in the Sky seems VERY original to Twilight Princess and almost all of its content would not be in Ocarina of Time (Enemies and items found only in Twilight Princess, the presence of Occas (A race also found only in Twilight Princess), etc. Enemies Do you think the reason for why such species like Deku Baba are found on this floating city is due to it was originally built on the ground, possibly near habitats that they inhabited? Dark Ridley 02:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC) Should it be mentioned that this was probably inspired by Laputa from Gulliver's Travels? --Tamagotchi (talk) 00:00, November 7, 2009 (UTC) Is Skyloft the old version of City in the Sky? Think about it this way. City in the Sky is pretty much floating landmass built on top of with buildings. What if Skyloft is that? Considering that SS is now considered a prequel of OoT K'jal'mar ( The talk| ) 17:27, January 16, 2011 (UTC) :Yes, what if. --AuronKaizer ''' 02:55, January 17, 2011 (UTC) Used to be (urgh, im starting to get pretty dogged down from getting every theory i proposed absolutely shot down by Xykeb) The city in the sky may be what became of the Wind Tribe's tower, for several reasons. Like the tower, the city in the sky seems to be floating above lake hylia, as both are reached from there. Unlike skyloft, which appears to be held up by magic (or something), these two areas both use powerful propulsion systemsIt's heavily implied that the oocoo are not thw original creators of the city, and the wind tribe is easily one of the most technologically advanced groups in any zelda game. This isn't the entire theory, just a presented concept, so yeah, hang off on immediately shooting this down Protomix (talk) 18:36, March 22, 2012 (UTC) :Bang bang! On a serious note, why don't you wait until you have the "full concept" then, or is this just a ploy avoid being "shot down" on account of lacking information provided, as it were? --AuronKaizer ' 17:09, March 22, 2012 (UTC) ::Frankly, I've grown tired of putting up massive collumns of information detailing every possible piece of evidence i can find, only to have it be rejected for some arbitrary reason. Too much effort for no benefit Protomix (talk) 18:36, March 22, 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry, but you need to stop. You said you understood when I messaged you on your talk page, but clearly you ''don't. You are doing the same thing over and over again, which is making theories based on pure speculation without enough actual, full, fact in them. Honestly, I'm not even going to bother explaining this time because I've already done so twice. Your theories are shot down by Xykeb every time because they all have the same problem which you are refusing to address. Also, I'd like to point out that in this "theory", you have incorrect information: the Wind Tribe's Tower is not located above Lake Hylia, nor is it reached from there. It is reached from (and located above, presumably) the Veil Falls. It is also not proven that the Wind Tribe uses propulsion systems because we never see the bottom of the tower. I'd like to point out that Zeldapedia is not a site for posting your theories, which you seem to think it is, it is an online encyclopedia, primarily for facts. You're concentrating all your energy on making theories, all of which are shot down because of the same problem that you refuse to address. These theories are not being "rejected for some arbitrary reason", they're being rejected because they don't have enough basis in hard facts, something we've been trying to explain to you for days. Additionally, can you please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~)? Sorry if this comes off as too harsh, but that's the reality of it. -'Minish Link' 17:40, March 22, 2012 (UTC) :::see, i would make absolutely no grievance about my theories being rejected if it was responded to like this, with definitive reasoning. I don't expect all these theories to be approved, and that's why i put them in the talk page, rather than on the actual information page. It's simply that the theories were what made me really like this wiki in the first place, that it explores the zelda universe beyond what is plainly stated, and i guess i was trying to contribute to that fact. Protomix (talk) 18:36, March 22, 2012 (UTC) ::::Your theories all have been responded to with definitive reasoning. You just like to pretend they haven't because you prefer Minish's style of critique to my own. More to the point, though, we shouldn't need to provide definitive reasoning shooting down your theories if you yourself cannot provide definitive reasoning to support them. The problem isn't necessarily that we think your theories are improbable, it's that the theories do not have enough evidence to be considered probable. Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 01:49, March 23, 2012 (UTC)